Gold Country Wildlife Rescue Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 680259665
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2010
- Location
- Auburn, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5308850862
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,919,452
- Expenses
- $1,409,788
- Assets
- $1,967,409
- Liabilities
- $165,198
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Sallysue Stein (President/Exec)
People named in this filing
- Sallysue Stein (President/Exec)
- Dana Fasolette (Vice Pres/Direc)
- Christy Berger (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Rescuing, rehabilitating, and releasing injured, sick and orphaned wildlife while advancing public awareness and understanding of the critical role of wildlife within the ecosystems we share.
What it reported doing in 2024
California has some of the most abundant and diverse wildlife in the U.S.; this is a source of pride and multiple benefits for the state. With this wealth, however, comes a responsibility, to protect our native wildlife, who need our help now more than ever. Wildfires, climate change, drought and habitat loss threaten every species and have dramatically increased the numbers of animals requiring treatment annually.In 1991, the year that Gold Country Wildlife Rescue was founded, the population of Placer County was 180,000 people. At that time GCWR handled approximately 300 animals annually.Today, the County's population has more than doubled, now exceeding 410,300 people. At the same time, the demands on GCWR have increased twelve-fold, with 3,700 animals cared for in 2020, and more than 12,000 calls from people needing assistance with wildlife. In 2023, these numbers further increased with almost 4,000 animals cared for and almost 13,500 phone calls.But that's not the whole story. Compounding the impact of the growing demand for care (and resources) is an increase in the severity of the animals injuries seen. This results in a requirement for more extensive and continuous care along with longer rehabilitation times. This, in turn, requires more space to house the animals, overwhelming the capacity of the current facility's space and infrastructure.2018 was the first year we provided acute medical and rehabilitative care to the wildlife victims including a bobcat and two gray foxes that sustained burns and injuries from the Camp Fire in Butte County. In 2020, we provided care for a bear cub, a gray fox, a bobcat, and two coyotes that suffered burns and injuries sustained in wildfires that impacted multiple counties across Northern California. It was at this time that we became a member organization of Wildlife Disaster Network (founded 2020). In 2021 our number of burn patients increased, with us taking in ten more wildfire victims (the most in one year to date). These victims included 3 black bear cubs leading California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to grant GCWR our permanent bear cub rehabilitation permit. In 2022 we cared for 2 black bear cubs. In 2022 we started construction of an apex predator enclosure that meets and exceeds requirements as determined by CDFW. In 2023 we were able to complete half of the enclosure and raised 5 orphaned black bear cubs. Coinciding with the rapid rise in the number of animals being treated annually, GCWR has transformed itself from a small seasonal rescue and rehabilitation operation to a remarkably high-functioning organization that is open 365 days a year. GCWR has remained financially solvent throughout this period of transformation, which has been brought about by staff and by a dedicated group of volunteers who provide more than 35,000 hours of service each year. In 2020, GCWR acquired a 15-acre property in Auburn and secured the donation of eight modular units that will be used for emergency wildlife intake, veterinary care, rehabilitation, education, and administrative offices. In 2023 we continued to build animal enclosures, including the above-mentioned apex predator enclosure.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 58
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 53.2%; rating input score 53
- Program expense ratio: 72.1%; rating input score 72
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 26.6%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.4; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 24.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 25.3% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 31.4% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 53.2% of revenue deployed · 72.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.